United States v. Li Fat Tong’s Empirical Analysis
152 F.2d 650 · 1945
Citation profile
47 federal appellate · 1 district · 18 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 77 later decisions (1 by the Supreme Court) — most recently June 1973 · most notably Roviaro v. United States (1957), 45 Cal. 2d 652 - People v. Boyles (1955)
47 federal appellate · 1 district · 18 state decisions
Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.
Relationships
Relies on Carroll v. United States · Weeks v. United States · Husty v. United States · Hem v. United States · Scher v. United States
Most-quoted passages
The sentences later courts lift from this opinion, ranked by how many decisions quote each — the parts of the opinion doing the work. These counts are smaller than the citation total above because most of the 77 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““There is no reason to suppose that hearsay evidence derived from an informer is not as competent evidence on which to show probable cause for an arrest as any other proof. The weight to be given it is a matter for the sound discretion of the court which was exercised on the motion to suppress.””
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
How this case has been treated — in progress
Whether each later court followed, distinguished, criticized, or overruled this decision. The treatment classification (task #35) runs highest-cited cases first and lights up here as it reaches this one.